Objectifying Discomfort by leahcromett

Leah Cromett

OBJECTIFYING DISCOMFORT A thesis submitted to California Polytechnic State University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Architecture, 2021 California Polytechnic State University School of Architecture and Environmental Design

ob-jec-ti-fy /uhb-jek-tuh-fahy/

verb

1. degrade to the status of a mere object. 2. express (something abstract) in a concrete form.

Objectifying Discomfort

thank you to everyone who has lent a hand.

abstract 8. a personal note: THE COSTS OF COMFORT 16. comfort + consumerism 22. the example of Amazon AWARENESS + PERCEPTION 38. perceptions of discomfort 46. emotional objects 56. dolls + the uncanny 66. the power of puppets 76. approaching the problem OBJECTIFIED DISCOMFORTS 84. object 1 96. object 2 106. object 3 114. object 4 126. object 5 146. the orb 164. https://dalesdolls.cargo.site/Leah bibliography

Objectifying Discomfort

Paper dolls in a box (Oatman-Stanford).

abstract Our desire for comfort is exploited by corporations in America. Capitalism fosters the search for extreme and constant comfort as companies market their products by suggesting they will make your life easier, better, and more comfortable. If discomfort can be exploited by corporations in such effective and persuasive manners to manipulate public thought it can also be harnessed by individual people and empower them to their own understanding of the natures of discomfort and its implications. How can discomfort be objectified to give individuals autonomy over their perception of and reaction to (dis) comfort?

Objectifying Discomfort

a personal note: I receive texts from friends with photos they have taken of odd dolls while going about their days. Dolls that are missing limbs and stuffed in a drawer on the street, dolls with blackened eyes stuck into the front yard for halloween. “Thinking of you” they’ll write, because they know if I were there I would pick them up, or just really admire them from afar, depending on the context. I can’t help myself, I find myself gravitating towards the “creepy dolls” wherever they are found. Some are better than others, I don’t think all dolls, or even all “creepy dolls”, are things that I am drawn towards, but I do find something special in a good number of them. Maybe part of it is nostalgia, only making cakes with Barbie dolls sticking out of them for my friends now because it was something I always wanted as a child. Or maybe part of me is truly reliving happy

moments from childhood that I can recreate for fleeting moments today by picking up a certain doll. What I tell myself though, is that I am really just interested in how the people around me in these situations react. When guests come over to my house, I will bring out Object in my arms as one would cradle a baby, and hand him to the guest as if they were actually meeting my child. Object is a “creepy doll” that I purchased for 50 cents at a resale store in Morro Bay, CA. The initial reaction is always one of discomfort when I bring Object out to meet anyone. People are usually hesitant to touch the doll at first, and make comments about how strange its hair is sticking straight out of its head or that it looks like the Chucky doll from horror movies. When I come back later I often find Object in people’s laps or placed in a position where they seem to be part of whatever

conversation is taking place. People begin to speak about the doll as if it were a real person. My roommate once told me that “Object was just on vacation in Tulum, Mexico” after he had spent the night before looking at vacation homes online. My roommates acted disgusted by Object when I first brought him home, but now whenever I talk about dismantling the doll to use for a project, or when talk of

Object no longer being in the house comes up, they are all adamant that he must remain in our house, intact. They consider the doll part of our house “family” now. There is fear and vulnerability intertwined in dolls and humanoid figures. There is also something about them that offers some sort of uncanny connection and allows for introspection into our own lives. This is where this thesis begins...

Objectifying Discomfort

Maria and Object at dinner. Anette and Michael giving Object a kiss. Johnny excited to be holding a swaddled Object. Anette playing with Object and her cat.

Beatrix taking a nap with Object. Michael, me and Object. Object sitting on Elena’s lap as she works on the computer. Violeta holding and smiling at Object.

Objectifying Discomfort

The inner workings of a mechanical sex doll (Canepari).

the costs of comfort

Objectifying Discomfort

comfort + consumerism The meaning of comfort has been constructed over the last couple hundred years by western societies. Comfort is difficult to define- it is highly subjective because it is a state of being an individual experiences, and is often only thought about in the presence of discomfort. We can experience (dis)comfort emotionally as well as physically. Emotional discomfort can exist within feelings of fear, regret, grief, and guilt. Physical comfort, as defined by John Crowley in his book The Invention of Comfort, is the “self-conscious satisfaction with the relationship between one’s body and its immediate physical

environment” (Crowley). Our perceptions of comfort change over time as new technologies, services, and ways of life emerge. As our ways of living evolve, our thinking changes too, normalizing these shifts. These changes take place across every aspect of our lives and are reflected in the language we use (Brown). Normalization can be an extremely positive thing, however, our tendency to normalize change within society and our every day lives can happen fast and be dangerous. During the Trump presidency hateful rhetoric, white supremacy, and violence was normalized through the

the Costs of Comfort

language of the former president and became more widespread across the globe. The normalization of western perceptions of beauty has fostered the toxic idea that there are right and wrong ways to look and has led to a billion dollar beauty industry across the world. We have also normalized the idea that we are all “consumers”, the ways in which we consume, and our moral disconnects from systems of consumption. Today the United States is the largest consumer economy in the world. American production during World War II helped pull the country out of depression and consumerism became seen as a patriotic act once the war was over- purchasing material goods helped the economy and your fellow Americans (The Rise of American Consumerism). During this time American families were purchasing homes in the suburbs and cars to get them there, as well as millions of refrigerators and stoves; items that would “help them modernize their lives” (The Rise of American Consumerism). Tupperware created jobs for women who had been pushed out of the workforce after the war ended by creating a business model centered around them. Housewives held Tupperware parties to sell plastic

bowls and kitchenware to their friends and neighbors, bringing a new kind of consumerism into suburban homes across the country. More than one hundred years before Tupperware had even been invented, a French sociologist by the name Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in 1831 that Americans “are universally preoccupied with meeting the body’s every need and attending to life’s little comforts” (McRobbie). How did this desire for comfort become mainstream American thinking? Crowley notes that “much of the cultural originality of early political economy stemmed from an intellectual effort to legitimize popular consumption, especially when it involved new types of goods” (Crowley). There began to be less of a differentiation between necessity and luxury as “the improvement of people’s immediate physical circumstances became a major cultural project of French, British, and American philosophies” in the eighteenth-century (Crowley). Growing capitalist societies promoted consumerism and changed people’s perceptions of comfort. In the U.S. today there exists a mainstream culture that pushes this capitalist idea of comfort by glorifying wealth and individualism- the value

Objectifying Discomfort

of a person is linked to their “success” which is measured monetarily. When you web search a celebrity one of the first pieces of information presented is their net worth. These celebrities promote lives of extreme material excess and comfort through media. Architectural Digest videos touring multi-million dollar celebrity homes have millions of views online; celebrity endorsed advertisements push narratives that the products they are selling will make your life more like their own; magazines and newspapers feature the rich and famous daily, normalizing their excessive lifestyles and wealth. The consistent and often overwhelming media presence of the very wealthy normalizes materially excessive lifestyles. Millennials believe that they have a better chance of being a millionaire than ending up houseless even though growing economic inequality in the country suggests otherwise (Head Solutions Group). The glorification and normalization of the wealthiest people in our society is violent. While it suggests that money is the largest driver of happiness and success, it ignores the consequences of an individual’s wealth. When Kylie Jenner is featured on the cover of

a magazine, the articles inside talk about her social life, her lavish homes, or her successful business while failing to mention how any of these things were actually able to come to fruition. No one seems to be bothered by the fact that much of her money and success comes at the price of the environment and other people (thank you normalization). The amount of resources that are used to support Jenner’s lifestyle is unsustainable and people working under her brand are being exploited. While Jenner makes billions of dollars from the sales of her KYLIE product line, the workers making these products are being paid extremely low (sometimes null) wages. This side of an individual’s monetary success- the exploitation of the environment and of other people that is inevitable in the making of a millionaire (or billionaire), is not mentioned in these magazine cover stories. There is a disconnect between the individual and their impact on the systems they are connected to. When the ultimate goal is wealth, how this wealth is achieved is not a main concern. The normalization of excessive consumerism and the glorification of wealth in American society has created an environment that allows people to act without

the Costs of Comfort

An advertisement stressing the mutual benefits for everyone at a Tupperware party (Everyone (Everyone Benefits at a Tupperware Party!). Party!).

Objectifying Discomfort

thinking about how it may be affecting the lives of people around them and across the globe. The main job that a consumer has in American society is to consume. However, we are not born consumers, we are made into them. It is estimated that an average American today is exposed to somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 advertisements a day. An average American child can identify over 1,000 corporate logos but can only name a handful of the local plant and animal species where they live (Armitage). Companies bombard us with advertisements because they need us- no company could exist without their patrons. However, consumers don’t think their buying power holds much weight, especially when they are buying from a large company. What difference does one person make in resisting a purchase from, say, Amazon, when there are over a million other people making purchases from them every day? This kind of thinking allows consumers to avoid moral commitment and to make choices that are the most comfortable for themselves. It allows consumers to detach themselves from their choices and the consequences of where they put their money. As long as these large companies provide comfortable

and convenient services to individual consumers, it doesn’t matter to the customer how they are able to do it. There is an argument that the consumer is not to blame for the wrongdoings of companies, and that governments should be left to regulate them from the top down. In 1907 Theodore Roosevelt said, “The fortunes amassed through corporate organization are now so large, and vest such power in those that wield them, as to make it a matter of necessity to give to the sovereign—that is, to the Government, which represents the people as a whole—some effective power of supervision over their corporate use” (Kennedy). There is government oversight of corporations today, but it is minimal, and mostly focused on protecting consumers (the lifeblood of our capitalistic economy). Due to the Sherman Act, the “only measure of consumer welfare is low prices. Nothing a company can do, no matter how disruptive or craven, is worthy of Sherman Act scrutiny if the company’s actions enable it to lower prices” (Caine 89). The government barely looks out for consumers and doesn’t provide much help for anyone else. The federal minimum wage is $7.25, $6.18 less than the living wage for one adult living in Mississippi,

the Costs of Comfort

the cheapest state to reside in. In 2017 the Trump Administration cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, promising that a “trickle down effect” would increase the average American household income by $4000- which it did not (Hendricks). “The American tax code is too lenient on billionaires and their massively profitable companies” writes Danny Caine (Caine 87). Trump’s administration also argued that this tax cut would allow companies to invest in technologies to increase worker productivity, which would allow employees to bargain for higher wages (Hendricks). The latest attempt Amazon warehouse workers made to unionize in Bessemer, Alabama failed in April 2021. The government definitely has a role to play in the regulation of large companies and corporations, but that doesn’t mean they are successful in doing so. There is a large corporate lobbying presence in the halls of the Capital and many politicians are endorsed and financially supported by these same companies, leaving many politicians in no position to take a stand against them. Good policy is not created at the top, it starts as grassroots movements made up of individual people seeking change.

Resistance to big corporations starts with the individual. How can we strip ourselves of this label of “consumer” and empower ourselves to believe that our individual choices do have an impact on the world around us? Can we reclaim our perceptions of (dis)comfort and normalize a resistance to exploitive corporations? Is it possible to look beyond the creative advertising strategies of companies and beyond our own desires for comfort and convenience and see the suffering and destruction our excessive consumerism is having?

Objectifying Discomfort

A Jeff Bezos doll standing next to a “pet” robot, artist unknown (photo via StockX.com)

the Costs of Comfort

the example of Amazon The problems that come along with Americans’ consumerism don’t start and end with one corporation, but Amazon provides a great example to look at. If you take a walk around the block odds are high that you will see it— the arrow that points from “a” to “z” from the underside of the word “Amazon”. Amazon is the world’s largest online retailer, shipping out around 1.6 million packages a day according to 2020 data (Buck). The Amazon marketplace carries over 350 million different products, 12 million of them are Amazon products. For Prime members, Amazon offers free 2-hour delivery on thousands of “daily essentials” and free 2-day delivery on 12 million products. The company started off as an online book seller but over the last 27 years Amazon has grown to become the largest online retailer in the United States and has acquired around 100 other companies along the way while also getting its hands into media production, streaming services, web services, delivery systems, and brick and mortar stores. On the surface there seems to be nothing wrong with Amazon, it’s just a successful company delivering products and services that

people want and are willing to pay for, but how Amazon operates is problematic for its employees, local economies, and our communities. Amazon’s blue collar employees are over worked and treated poorly. Workers in Amazon warehouses walk around with digital devices counting down the seconds they have left to grab a specific item while simultaneously tracking and evaluating their every move. In an interview with The New Yorker, William Stolz, an Amazon warehouse worker, said he is allotted eight seconds to pick up an item before he is expected to move to his next task (Duhigg). If workers fall behind on their timed tasks they can be fired with little to no explanation (Duhigg). Workers are often injured on the job trying to keep up with the quick pace assigned to them. Amazon warehouse workers are seriously injured at twice the rate as the average industry worker (Caine 33). The company provides vending machines full of free overthe-counter painkillers to employees to combat the injuries they sustain while working (Duhigg). Amazon warehouse employee Safiyo Mohamed is quoted in the New Yorker saying,

Objectifying Discomfort

“I’m so angry. Amazon doesn’t want humans, they want robots... They don’t care at all,” (Duhigg). Mohamed had been injured on the job (Duhigg). Amazon workers have tried to unionize in an attempt to protect themselves from some of the harsh conditions working at the company presents, but the company will do whatever, or pay however much, to prevent this. One video shown to workers stated “...having a union could hurt innovation, which could hurt customer obsession, which could ultimately threaten the building’s continued existence,” (Duhigg). Call center workers in Seattle, WA tried to unionize in 2000 and Amazon simply shut down the entire call center to prevent unionization (Duhigg). The latest attempt to unionize happened in Bessemer, AL in April 2021. When word of a union effort got out, warehouse workers were met with a massive anti-union campaign from Amazon. Workers were subjected to mandatory meetings filled with antiunion rhetoric, anti-union posters on the walls, and were encouraged to drop off their ballots in an unmarked mailbox out front of the warehouse entrance that appeared weeks before the vote deadline. (E-mails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act reveal that “Amazon officials repeatedly called USPS’ strategic

account manager seeking the installation of a private box”) (Wilkins). The vote to unionize did not pass. Not all of the people that work for Amazon are even Amazon employees. Amazon employs contract workers through third party contracts to cut costs. This allows Amazon to advertise that they pay their workers a minimum wage of $15/hr while using the labor of contract workers who are paid far less than this. Some of these companies exist solely to deliver Amazon packages, and the workers may even wear Amazon vests, but these employees are not Amazon employees. “In fact, even at fulfillment centers, not all the pickers and stowers are Amazon employees. On average, a third of the workers at fulfillment centers are temps, and that percentage increases during the peak holiday season” (Caine 41). Amazon Flex is a delivery system that uses gig workers to deliver packages using their own cars, similar to Uber. These workers receive no health insurance or pensions, and are not guaranteed a set amount of hours. Caine writes, “Warehouse workers are pushed to make rates no humans can sustainably maintain. Delivery drivers and temp workers are considered contractors and stripped of benefits and protections. Workers are injured

the Costs of Comfort

“AS AN AMAZON ASSOCIATE, you already have great rewards and benefits. Remember everything you already have without giving any of your hard-earned money to the RWDSU. You already have: health care, vision, and dental benefits, high wages, paid leave, 401[k] match, paid time off, career opportunities, and more. Know your worth before signing up for a union that doesn’t know you!”

An anti-union propaganda poster in an Amazon warehouse before the union vote in Bessemer, AL (Hamilton).

Objectifying Discomfort

Welcome! You are the most important being and whatever you desire shall be yours! Nothing can stand in the way of you and your ultimate comfort! Do you want new shoes? Are you almost out of toothpaste? Need a book? JUST CLICK TO BEGIN!

What a bea It’s easy to buy anything on Amazon! Just CLICK! CLICK! and in two hours anything can be delivered straight to your door! could have Be careful though, don’t start thinking about what’s behind the curtain....

Jeff Bezos, Amazon CEO

...And 798,000 other Amazon workers. Let’s go check up with one by the vending machines full of free over-the-counter painkillers! These are t Seattle! Lo

the Costs of Comfort

much more often than staffers at other companies’ warehouses. But these working conditions are necessary to maintain Amazon’s promises of convenience and customer obsession. Before you tell Alexa to buy toilet paper, think about what’s required of the humans that’ll make your Charmin arrive by tomorrow” (Caine 42). The massive presence of Amazon also hurts smaller companies and local communities. The company offers a digital platform for retailers to list and sell their goods, essentially a virtual mall, hosting more than three hundred and thirty million non-Amazon products on the site (Duhigg). Consumers flock to the site for the convince of being able to shop a plethora of products in one place. The increase in the use of Amazon has caused a decrease in sales for other companies, causing many smaller stores to have to close up shop. When people choose to purchase an item from Amazon, a local store in their neighborhood loses a sale, while Amazon collects more consumer data. All parties selling goods on Amazon are subject to the company’s terms and conditions, and must pay them a percentage of their profits, much like any other online retail site. However, unlike other sites, Amazon collects data from consumers about

their buying habits, and uses this data to promote their own products, which are sometimes blatant knockoffs of other company’s products listed on the site. Amazon can sell these knock-off products for a much lower price than the original company and negatively effect the actual company’s sales. Of course companies don’t have to sell their products through Amazon’s site, but Amazon is where consumers go to shop— right now (in 2021) 148.6 million people are subscribers to Amazon’s Prime program (Sabanoglu). Amazon will sometimes stockpile large amounts of a product to resell at any price they choose depending on the data they collect, which can undermine the image of a company and affect their profits.

Objectifying Discomfort

Amazon also allows third party sellers to operate through their site with little to no regulations on product quality. A 2019 investigation by the Wall Street Journal found “4,152 items for sale on Amazon.com Inc.’s site that have been declared unsafe by federal agencies, are deceptively labeled or are banned by federal regulators—items that bigbox retailers’ policies would bar from their shelves” (Berzon). Included in the list of items are children’s toys and medication (Berzon). In an interview, David Kahan, CEO of Birkenstock Americas, one company that has stopped using Amazon’s selling services, said “when there’s only one marketplace, and it’s impossible to walk away, everything is out of balance. Amazon owns the marketplace. They can do whatever they want. That’s not capitalism. That’s piracy” (Duhigg).

Even though Amazon rakes in millions of dollars of profits a day, the company pays little to no taxes. Entrepreneur and politician Andrew Yang has critiqued the company stating that Amazon is, “[closing] America’s stores and malls and paying zero in taxes while doing it” (Duhigg). When the city of Seattle passed a measure to build new homeless shelters and affordable housing by taxing companies with high numbers of employees, Amazon gave twenty-five thousand dollars to a group opposing the measure called No Tax on Jobs (Duhigg). “The opposition (Amazon) has unlimited resources,” said a Seattle city councillor after the measure had been repealed (Duhigg). While Amazon tries to pay as little as possible in taxes, they give to the federal government in other ways. Ring is a home security and “smart” home company owned by Amazon. They sell “doorbells” that allow customers to see, talk to, and record anyone that comes into the scope of the camera. If you are afraid of people stealing your Amazon packages, you can just buy a Ring camera to surveil your front porch! These cameras are advertised as home and community safety enhancers, but they contribute to a larger system of violence. Danny Caine writes, “Amazon has launched an initiative to get police

the Costs of Comfort

Objectifying Discomfort

“Amazon has changed the game completely. What they excel at is getting an object from a creator to a consumer as flawlessly as they can and as quickly as they can. So Amazon is changing people’s expectations and they are perpetually improving those expectations.”

-Simeon Siegel, Nomura Instinet Retail Analyst (Schoolov)

the Costs of Comfort

departments on board with Ring, and for police departments to get their constituents on board in turn. As of June 2020, more than 1300 police departments have signed up for programs that allow video sharing between their departments and Ring users. Police can request footage from users, or users can share ‘suspicious’ footage with police” (Caine 61). Through Ring, Amazon is helping to create a surveillance state and is giving police departments direct access. They also contract with ICE, a notoriously abusive government organization that horribly mistreats immigrants and migrants seeking refuge in the U.S. (Caine 64). The exploitation of workers, consumer data, and destruction of communities is not the stopping point for Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, he wants to go further than that. Bezos has a goal of harvesting the resources in space for human consumption and has dreamed since high school of “millions of people living and working in space, and exploring the entire solar system” (Fishman). He is quoted saying, “You’ll send the finished products down to Earth... And Earth will get zoned residential and light industrial” (Fishman). Space colonization is not what we need- we

need sustainable resources and practices rooted in community. We need workers to be paid livable wages and treated with respect and dignity. We need workers to be able to form unions. We need regulation on products sold online. We need small companies to be able to stay in business. We need to ask ourselves if we’re okay with the way that Amazon runs its business and question the propaganda the corporation feeds us. We need to reflect on how Amazon has changed our perceptions and expectations of what it means to be a consumer. We need to ask ourselves if the comfort and convenience Amazon offers ourselves is worth the mistreatment and exploitation of other people. Amazon, like all other businesses, markets itself as an ethical company, but the problematic things they do are not unknown or undocumented. The malpractices and mistreatment that takes place in their warehouses, behind their website, and their contracts with violent state organizations is well documented and public information. If Amazon is causing such harm to communities and individuals, why do 62% of American households have Amazon Prime accounts? Why do people not

Objectifying Discomfort

seem to care that the people behind the delivery of their purchases are peeing in water bottles and shitting in bags because they aren’t given time to take bathroom breaks? (Gilbertson). Maybe some people really are not aware of the issues with Amazon because the smiling logo is enough to convince them that everything is okay. Or maybe people choose to ignore these issues because they don’t effect them personally. Maybe we have successfully normalized the disconnect between our actions and the consequences they create for the world outside of ourselves to the extent that people don’t even realize they are there. Maybe the only thing that matters to our consumer selves is that our personal needs are met with the utmost comfort and convenience. Amazon is a problem, but it’s not the only one. None of this starts or ends with Amazon. Under our current economic system there are always going to be people trying to make money by exploiting and mistreating others, just as enslavers did during our country’s founding, during the building of the railroads, and like corporations operating in our country continue to do today. This project looks at Amazon specifically for a few reasons: 1. the size of the

corporation and how much power they have consolidated; 2. Amazon has capitalized on consumer’s desires for comfort and convenience so successfully that they have changed our perceptions of comfort; and 3. the odds are that you, reader and consumer, are a patron of Amazon. Simeon Siegel, a Retail Analyst at Nomura Instinet, said, “Amazon has changed the game completely. What they excel at is getting an object from a creator to a consumer as flawlessly as they can and as quickly as they can. So Amazon is changing people’s expectations and they are perpetually improving those expectations.” Amazon has tapped into our desires for comfort and has created an environment where consumers don’t have to think- we can just click a few buttons online and items magically appear at our doors. If our perceptions of comfort can be changed by corporations, they can be changed by ourselves too. We have the power to look at things we have normalized and reevaluate our relationships to the world around us. This project asks you, a consumer, to question your normalized expectations and aims to give you autonomy over your perceptions of (dis)comfort .

the Costs of Comfort

“The entirety of the lowwage economy needs to be reexamined, and the whole country should be soul searching about why we’re so comfortable asking people to work so hard for wages and benefits that can’t pay their bills. But I think a good place to start asking those questions is with the company that’s making more money than anyone else.” -Danny Caine, author of How to Resist Amazon and Why

Objectifying Discomfort

Nyet Nyet Women by Snuff Puppets (Hawkes)

awareness + perception

Objectifying Discomfort

perceptions of (dis)comfort When we are comfortable, we are at ease, free of pain, constraint, anxiety... The word “comfort” comes from the latin word confortare and is defined in part as a “state of embodiment that is beyond awareness... a state of an integrated body” (Morse 190). We don’t often notice when we are “comfortable”. To know comfort one must know discomfort— when the physical body faces discomfort its existence is no longer able to be ignored by the mind, distracting from how the mind normally interprets the world. The meaning of comfort has evolved over time; in medieval times discomfort was associated with dirtiness and implied disrespect, during the 12th-17th centuries “comfort was associated primarily with fabrics and their cleanliness”, and the idea of physical comfort wasn’t commonplace until it was being taught and learned in AngloAmerican culture (Crowley). What individuals consider (un)comfortable

changes with time and between cultures. In their book, The Invention of Comfort, John Crowley writes that “technology, social structures, and belief systems” all impact our perceptions of comfort (Crowley). David Ellison and Andrew Leach write, “Comfort is something that sets the modern age apart from its predecessors” (Thinking through Discomfort). As we normalize innovation in our daily lives, our perceptions of comfort shift. Today, we associate chairs with comfort, however, chairs are actually bad for our backs. Chairs became perceived as essential objects of comfort after European culture necessitated them as leisure furniture and they eventually became commonplace (Crowley). Another example of a shift in our perceptions of comfort is air conditioning. Air conditioning was invented in 1902 and was only used in commercial factories and offices for most of the

Awareness + Perception

“If comfort were a specific response to material living conditions, we should be able to measure it, but architects have found it difficult to specify, much less design, a uniformly comfortable environment...architecture schools avoid the topic. In contrast, anthropologists expect to find people in different cultures and in the past to have varying ideas of what constitutes satisfactory relations of body, material culture, and environment.”

-John Crowley, The Invention of Comfort

Objectifying Discomfort

century (McRobbie). By 1993, 68 percent of homes in the United States had air conditioning, with more and more people wanting cooler and more consistent home temperatures (McRobbie). As air conditioning became normalized in people’s homes and daily lives, expectations and perceptions of comfort shifted with this change. Today you probably expect all stores and restaurants that you enter to be air conditioned. Once we become accustomed to a higher standard of comfort it’s difficult for us to break away from it. Our desire for comfort is natural and there’s nothing wrong with it, but it becomes a problem when our comfort is coming at the expense of other people, which it often does. Workers are exploited under corporations to produce goods and services that are aimed at our comfort. We want to be able to make extremely inexpensive purchases from Amazon and have them show up at our front door in under two days because it’s comfortable- you don’t have to even move. And this kind of consuming has been normalized by both Amazon, who markets their services as easy and convenient, and by everyone that uses them. We know that Amazon abuses their employees and communities in order for their

customers to have access to such services- this is when our desire for comfort becomes a problem. People turn a blind eye to abuses taking place because what they are getting is comfort and convenience. How can we challenge our normalized perceptions of (dis)comfort so we can see and challenge the abuses that corporations are committing against their workers? There can’t be solidarity among the people when individuals only want to be comfortable. Can we reclaim our perceptions of (dis)comfort from those who seek money and power? Can discomfort be a positive thing? How can perceptions of (dis)comfort be challenged and explored? Can we objectify discomfort and use it as a tool to normalize our perceptions of (dis)comfort? Can we use discomfort objects as tools to create wider acceptance within people’s beliefs? There are infinite reasons why our perspectives might change and shift, but this project focuses on two factors that can help facilitate this change: 1. Ownership, and 2. Time. The endowment effect is the idea that someone will assign a higher value to something if they own it. This has been proven by researchers like Lisa Kramer who demonstrates this live with two volunteers that come up

Awareness + Perception

onto the stage during a presentation. She gives the first volunteer a mug as a “gift” from herself, then proceeds to ask the volunteer how much money it would take for someone to buy the mug from them. After a few moments, the volunteer responds, “Ten bucks.” Kramer then asks the second volunteer how much money they would be willing to buy that same mug for from the first volunteer. The second volunteer says, “Five, six dollars.” This is an example of the endowment effect. Just by owning the mug, the value of the item was higher for the first volunteer, while the second volunteer valued the mug at almost half of that value. This project looks at object ownership as an important factor in being able to shift people’s perspectives. It aims to give people autonomy of objects at an individual scale. The second major factor this project looks at is time. The more time people spend exposed to something, the more that something becomes normalized by those people. We can look at the example of Object (See A Personal Note). When individuals are first exposed to Object, they are immediately physically and emotionally uncomfortable. However, when people are given some time to spend with Object in a safe setting,

they become more and more familiarized with him, and become more comfortable with the doll. When someone meets Object for a second or third time, they are already much more comfortable with the doll than they were when they first met it. With time, people are able to settle into their discomforts little by little. Object, who is usually immediately labeled by users as “creepy” or “uncomfortable”, becomes familiar after some time. Thinking of something as temporary, or nonpermanent, also has an impact on our perceptions. For example, author Susan M. Schweik writes about the history of anti-beggar laws, or “Ugly Laws”, in the United States and the Philippines. Schweik provides examples from Chicago, Omaha, and Columbus wherein people were discriminated against based on being so-called “ugly”. The law was targeted at people who were described as diseased, maimed, mutilated, or in any way deformed, as well as people who the law called “abstractly disabled”. The “abstractly disabled” were any person who wasn’t a straight, white, American man, and who could be arrested for appearing “unsightly” in public. These laws were meant to rid “ugly people” from public spaces because they made others uncomfortable. This was taking place

Objectifying Discomfort

HEARTHS have been used by humans for at least 790,000 years.

TEXTILES have been around since 8000 B.C.E. and “have psychological and physical satisfactions: they [assert] status, [display] wealth, and [provide] protection” (Crowley 7).

PILLOW s date back to around 7,000 B.C.E.

RUNNING WATER came first from the Mesopotamians through clay sewer pipes around 4000 B.C.E.

CHAIRS have been around since Ancient Egypt and Greece. They are depicted in Egyptian tomb paintings and Greek art.

PAIN RELIEF has been achieved through consumption of opiates for thoursands of years. Pills date back to about 1500 B.C.E.

CHEST was a staple of medieval times for its ability to transport items (esp. textiles), also worked as a place to sleep or sit

DELIVERY of postage was first recorded in Rome under Augustus Caesar. The first food delivery service was for naengmyeon (cold noodle) in Korea, recorded in 1768.

TELEPHONE was invented in 1877 by either Alexander Graham Bell or Elisha Gray; both submitted patent applications for telephones in February 1878.

10.

LIGHTING Thomas Edison invented the lightbulb in 1878.

11.

CARS were invented by Carl Benz in 1886.

12.

R ADIO came into existance in the mid 1890s by Guglielmo Marconi.

13.

AIR CONDITIONING was invented in 1902, and was only really used in commercial factories and offices until late in the century. By 1993, 68 percent of homes in the United States had air conditioning, with more and more people wanting cooler and more consistent home temperatures

14.

TELEVISION (specifically the first transmission of a live human face) was achieved by John Logie Baird in 1925.

15.

COMFORT OBJECTS often in the forms of stuffed animals, blankets, toys, are common among young children. These objects help ease the transition from child’s attachment to mother to being independent in the world. The idea of transitional objects was first presented when pediatrician and psychoanalyst Dr Donald Winnicott published his paper “Transisional Objects and Transitional Phenomena— a Study of the First Not-Me Possession” in 1953.

16.

READY MADE FOOD (processed food) was invented in the 1950s.

17.

MICROWAVES were thought to have first been created by Percy Spencer in 1946.

Awareness + Perception

10 13 7 2

9 11

14 5 5 8 3

Items that have changed human standards of comfort.

Objectifying Discomfort

in cities, where circuses would stop through. Circuses, traveling shows, that successfully marketed themselves as strange and out of the ordinary. Unlike the “ugly people” that were arrested to take them out of the public eye, circuses were welcomed by the people living in cities. Why were the abnormalities of foreign circuses accepted while the visible physical abnormalities of people living in the cities were not? Circuses featured performers that had these same physical abnormalities as some of the people being arrested for it, so what was the difference? The difference was that people knew the circus was temporary. Knowing that the “freaks” that appeared on stage at night would be gone in the morning helped people accept their presence in their town. When there is a perception that something is or could be permanent, like a diseased, maimed, mutilated, or “abstractly disabled” person living in your city could be, a person’s openness to the abnormal shifts. People are much more likely to accept the strange, weird, abnormal, uncomfortable, if they believe it will only be around for a short period of time. Temperature can also be an influence on our perspectives. In two studies done, researchers concluded

that there is in fact a connection between a person’s physical experiences with temperature and the social interactions they have with other individuals (Williams). In the first study participants were handed a mug of either hot or cold coffee to hold for a moment, then were asked to complete a personality impression questionnaire that asked participants to rate the target person on personality traits using a bipolar scale . The study concluded that participants who had come into contact with the hot coffee cup “perceived the target person as being significantly warmer” than participants who had interacted with the cold coffee cup. The second test conducted asked participants to hold either a hot or cold therapeutic pad (after they were told that it was for a product review) then they were offered the choice to either take a reward for themselves for completing the study, or give a gift to a friend. The results showed that participants who interacted with the warm therapeutic pad were more likely to chose to give a gift to a friend rather then take a reward for themselves than participants who interacted with the cold therapeutic pad. Being physically warm changes people’s perceptions of others.

Awareness + Perception

“One of the great things about customers all over the world: they are divinely discontent. You give them the best service you can, they love it, but they always want a little bit more.”

-Jeff Bezos, Amazon CEO (Schoolov)

Objectifying Discomfort

br a

b er

ve l

nt en

d li

fe c

r is

Awareness + Perception

av e

rag

et i

rem

en t in

rag

at h

r ld

emotional objects

As humans we give meaning to the objects we own. “Transitional objects” (AKA “comfort objects”), often in the forms of stuffed animals, blankets, toys, are common among young children. These objects help ease the transition from child’s attachment to mother to being independent in the world. The idea of transitional objects was first presented when pediatrician and psychoanalyst Dr Donald Winnicott published his paper “Transisional Objects and Transitional Phenomena— a Study of

the First Not-Me Possession” in 1953. The attachment children have to their transitional objects is through touch as well as smell, and objects can help reduce anxiety and depression. It is ultimately the child who chooses a transitional object on their own accord. It turns out that comfort objects are kept and cherished by people of all ages, not just children. Through my own survey, I asked people what objects, if any, held emotional significance in their lives.

Objectifying Discomfort

Blanket [2013-2017] “I remember that it was blue and white and it had Snoopy. I miss it.” -Sebastian Stuffies [2012-TODAY] “It makes me feel loved.[It is] in my bed. I carry it around.” -Lucy Doggy Dog (stuffed husky)[2010-TODAY] “He was a fun little toy to play around with. I used to carry him in my mouth by his nose!”-Cammer Orca Whale (Stuffed Animal) [2014-TODAY] “I slept with it and I felt happy.” -Julian

Awareness + Perception

¤ ¡

Stuffed Reindeer [?-TODAY] “[I] bought it at a store in Seaside. It’s still in my room on my bed.” -Arielle Stuffed Bunny from the book ‘Goodnight Moon’ [3 months-TODAY] -Henry Mimi (pillow) [1995-2012] “[It was] made by my grandmother at age 1. My mom threw it away at age 18.” -Ariana Stuffed Dog [1987-TODAY] “[It’s] in my memory storage box.” -Rebecca

Objectifying Discomfort

Stuffed Rabbit [1988-TODAY] “[It was] given to me as an infant. I gave it to my daughter” -Janelle Blanket [1970s-1983] “It was soft and familiar.” -Jan Blanket [1982-TODAY] “It’s in a keepsake box.” -Angela A big, white stuffed Bear [?-TODAY] “My grandma gave it to me. I would hug it and it would make me feel better.” -Sue

Awareness + Perception

Washcloth [1960s-?] “My parents panicked when they lost my original blankie and substituted with a bathroom washcloth. To this day I love the feel of a rough washcloth on my face.” -Shelly

Blankie [?-LOST] “I just remember rubbing the silk edges against my face while sucking my

thumb. I notice that I often put my warm mug of coffee or tea against my left cheek where I once rubbed my blankie. It’s a reassuring gesture.” -Lisa Teddy Bear [1981-TODAY] “It’s at my place. I don’t interact with it but it gives me nostalgia.” -Joshua Chatty Cathy Doll [?-1975] “I liked having a doll I could talk to. I think a talking doll was helpful as a very little girl as it was someone to talk to and share secrets with.” -Karen A Little Bear [?-TODAY] “[It was] a gift from my parents.” -Issac

Objectifying Discomfort

Blanket [1945-LOST] “From my earliest memories I had the blanket. It was probably a baby gift.I have no idea what happened to it, [it] probably fell apart from being washed.” -Vickie Blanket [1964-1969] “When he was four years and four months he tossed it into the dump at the same time his father tossed away our raggedy Christmas tree. John was a brave boy that day.” -John’s Mother

Awareness + Perception

Objectifying Discomfort

evocative objects The book “Evocative Objects” edited by Sherry Turkle is a collection of essays about personal objects and their power in evoking both intellect and emotion in people. In each of the essays the author was asked to address the following questions about their object: “where does it take you?”; “what do you feel?”; and “what are you able to understand?” The essays are categorized by Turkle into six sections: Design and Play, Discipline and Desire, History and Exchange, Transition and Passage, Mourning and Memory, and Meditation and

New Vision. Turkle admits that the meanings of all objects shift with time, place, and perception, and doesn’t directly define what an evocative object is, rather she hopes that readers will “create their own associations, to combine and recombine objects and theories” (Turkle 308). Through my own reading of these essays I have attempted to identify the characteristics of these objects that make them so-called “evocative”. They are as follows:

1. The object is at a human scale 2. The object can be manipulated by the user to allow for individual expression 3. The object is a physical representation of an emotional connection with someone or ones self

Awareness + Perception

For example, an essay by Tod Machover about their cello titled “My Cello” can be characterized by all three of these identifiers. “Cellos, I found, are the perfect size. Violins are too petite, fingers stepping on fingers; the double bass is a struggle, hands stretched and muscles flexed. But the cello is the size of a human body, reaching the ground as its scroll grazes the top of the head of the seated musician,” writes Machover (Turkle 14). The human scale of this object, the cello, was an influencing factor in Machover’s decision to begin playing the instrument. The cello was made to create music, therefore it satisfies the second rule that allows for manipulation of the object in order to express oneself. Machover’s cello satisfies the third characteristic of an evocative object by being a connection to their mother and two daughters. Machover writes, “My daughters’ fits and starts with music have helped me to return to the cello with a fresh perspective” (Turkle 19). Another essay is about knots, centering around a young girl who’s parents had recently gotten divorced.

Author Carol Strohecker writes about the girl’s particular attachment to the so-called “Knot Lab” class she had created at MIT during Strohecker’s studies. By observing the way in which the girl made knots, Strohecker realized that the girl didn’t like to leave things unfinished, always encouraging other kids around her to finish the knot projects they had started as well. She would attach points of the string down to the surfaces she was working on, unlike any of the other children in the class. The final knot project she completed was a knot that was able to move when different strings were pulled. Strohecker was told by the girl one day that her parents were recently divorced and she felt as if she was in the middle of something being pulled back and forth, unsure of what the right things to do were. The knots this one girl was creating had become physical representations of her emotional connections to her parents’ divorce; this was able to happen because the string was 1. At human scale, and 2. Was able to be manipulated by the girl to allow for this individualized expression.

Objectifying Discomfort

A scan of three dolls found on the street.

Awareness + Perception

dolls + the uncanny Dolls have been a part of human life for thousands of years. The oldest dolls discovered were found in tombs in Egypt, Greece, and Rome. “There’s an innate human need to replicate itself ” said Daniel Randell in a 2019 interview about one of his doll collections (S. Doll). Across continents and cultures dolls are made and cherished, existing as reflections of their time and a universal human desire to possess miniature versions of oneself. There is no one reason why humans have continued to make and possess dolls across time; they have played parts in spiritual rituals, depicted gods, and have offered company to people of all ages, among many other uses. Paddle dolls, the dolls discovered in tombs in Egypt, were made from wood and linen and were most likely used in religious ceremonies meant to appease the gods (Paddle Dolls). Corn husk dolls were created by indigenous cultures that cultivated corn as a crop and were

used as toys and to share stories. Fast forward to 1950s Germany and you’ll come across a very popular comic strip that features a “gold-digging sex symbol”, a tall, thin, white, blonde woman named Lilli who spends her time seducing wealthy men (Blakemore). The comic became so popular that in 1955 they made Lilli into a doll to be sold in bars, adult toy stores and tobacco shops as a gag-gift for men (MessyNessy). This overtly sexualized doll for men was the inspiration for the now iconic Barbie doll after creator Ruth Handler discovered Lilli on a trip to Germany. Barbie made her debut in 1959 and unlike Lilli, was made to spread Handler’s belief that “through the doll, the little girl could be anything she wanted to be” (Our History). It was during this time in the 1950s that doll collecting became a popular hobby for many adults (S. Doll). In the 1970s Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori wrote an

Objectifying Discomfort

A corn husk doll (Museumadmin). An Egyptian Paddle doll (Paddle Doll). The original Barbie doll (Our History). German Lilli comics (MessyNessy).

Awareness + Perception

essay on what he called “the uncanny valley”. Mori believed people would react to robots that looked or performed like a real person. He believed that “a person’s response to a humanlike robot would abruptly shift from empathy to revulsion as it approached, but failed to attain, a lifelike appearance” (Mori). By mapping objects such as industrial machines and puppets on an axis of “Affinity” x “Human Likeness” Mori understood the trend to be a valley. This valley shows the points in which humans find certain objects, objects that are human-like but not fully Masahiro Mori’s graph of the Uncanny Valley (Mori).

human, to be uncanny. Mori’s essay was only the beginning of the study into what makes some non-human objects feel so jarring to us. There is ongoing debate and research over what exactly causes these feelings of uncanniness, and if this uncanny valley really even exists. In the 1990s the “Reborn Doll” was created, a genre of dolls that are handmade by enthusiasts to look as humanly realistic as possible. These dolls are purchased predominantly by collectors and by people who behave as if the dolls are real children

Objectifying Discomfort

A portrait of someone and their Reborn Doll by Jamie Diamond (Fry).

Awareness + Perception

to care for. Naomi Fry writes about these dolls in a New Yorker article, “...strangeness turns to uncanniness when we realize that the infant in the photograph is, in fact, [a] doll, one... meant to appear as much like a real baby as possible” (Fry). For some who have struggled with pregnancy or have experienced trauma such as the loss of a child, Reborn Dolls offer a chance to “parent” in an alternative way. Objects don’t necessarily have to look like humans to evoke uncanny feelings. “This is both adorable and terrifying at the same time,” reads a comment from YouTube user @ Margurite Zellen under a video titled “Teddy Has An Operation” (Zefrank1). The video begins with a doctor giving the stuffed teddy bear “bear gas” (understood to be anesthesia) on an operating table while a third party narrates the experience. First the bear is shaved with an electric razor across its stomach, then the doctor cuts into the bear and peels back its “skin” to reveal that the bear is filled with candy wrappers which are then unwrapped to reveal they are filled with cigarette butts. Underneath this layer of candy lies Teddy’s “play pouch”, a layer of skin-like material that is peeled back to reveal colorful sprinkles. When

further dug into, Teddy presents more uncanny features, like a real kidney that’s been penetrated by green and red crayons, a “courage sack” that is filled with real intestines and plastic bugs, and a massive fleshy heart holding a plastic figurine and a small plastic heart. Once the doctor has “fixed” all of the problems with Teddy it is sewn back up just like a normal surgery would go. This video has over forty-million views on YouTube. The combination of charming ordinary items such as crayons, plastic toys and colored sprinkles with raw organs from a once living thing, produce an extremely uncanny effect that obviously had an impact on millions of people. The line between object and being is blurred by both the physical combining of organ and object with the normalizing narration of each step.

Objectifying Discomfort

Teddy having an operation (Zefrank1).

Awareness + Perception

Objectifying Discomfort

Two humanoid sculptures by Patricia Piccinini, titled “Graham” and “The Comforter”.

Awareness + Perception

Part of a Louise Bourgeois piece titled Cell XXVI (Burke).

Objectifying Discomfort

“When we enjoy a puppet show in the theater, we are seated at a certain distance from the stage. The puppet’s absolute size is ignored, and its total appearance, including hand and eye movements, is close to that of a human being. So, given our tendency as an audience to become absorbed in this form of art, we might feel a high level of affinity for the puppet.” - Masahiro Mori, The Uncanny Valley (Mori)

Awareness + Perception

the power of puppets What we see impacts the way we think. Author and comedian Sarah Cooper has exploited this idea through the making of videos wherein she films herself lip-syncing audio clips of President Donald Trump. Cooper is asking the question, “What would it look like if she, a 35-year-old black woman, spoke with the blustering confidence of the president?” (Hesse). Cooper explains “[Trump] is an older, rich white guy, in a suit, at a podium, with a presidential seal, and people standing behind him, nodding. All of these things mess with your head

and make you think that what he says must make sense. I’m taking that setting away and putting those words into the mouth of someone who is much more low status and low power” (Hesse). Through these videos Cooper is successful in making the uncomfortable point that what you see impacts what you believe, what you think. Artist Marina Tsaplina believes in using puppetry as a way to challenge misconceptions of the disabled community. Tsaplina says, “[puppetry] can open vivid aesthetic

Objectifying Discomfort

and affective responses in audiences that have the potential to widen and deepen how beauty, body, and being are perceived” (Tsaplina). Puppetry presents stories in ways that “The very material of a puppet body/performing object creates an opportunity to cross normative borders the way few mediums can. Listening to the materiality of the form allows for the puppet to not represent anything other than itself.” (Tsaplina). Another artist working with ideas of puppetry and anthropomorphism is Nick Cave. His “Soundsuits” are wearable pieces that purposefully conceal the

identity of the performer, allowing them to present themselves only as the Soundsuit they are wearing. The first Soundsuit Cave, a Black man, made was a response to the brutality Rodney King suffered at the hands of Los Angeles police in 1991. The suit is made out of sticks Cave collected off of the ground and makes noise when moved. The attention the suit draws to the wearer represents the over-policing of marginalized communities in the United States and the masking of the wearer’s identity is a response to how marginalized peoples’ “individual humanity is often denied” (Cave).

Awareness + Perception

A Soundsuit by artist Nick Cave (Prinz). Marina Tsaplina performing The Invisable Elephant Project (Tsaplina).

Objectifying Discomfort

Awareness + Perception

Puppetry allows people to listen in new ways. It allows conversation to be abstracted a degree. The attention that might be focused on an individual is instead focused on an object that has been given life. We are able to project ourselves onto these objects and take the time and space we need to hear what the puppeteer is saying, without feeling like we are listening to them.

These diagrams take a look at different forms of traditional puppetry to determine the effects that sight has on perception. They aim to get at the questions: what is considered person and what is considered object? Where is the line between human and object? At what point do our interactions with objects begin to determine the objectification of ourselves?

Objectifying Discomfort

Wearable masks by artist Tracy Widdess. Widdess practices what they call “Brutal Knitting” to cope with extreme anxiety and depression.

Awareness + Perception

A flesh suit created by artist Daisy Collingridge being worn by a person (Cheer).

Objectifying Discomfort

Awareness + Perception

Objectifying Discomfort

fabric

yarn

E RIC

RIC

beads

RIC

rice

RIC

lavender

Awareness + Perception

approaching the problem This project objectifies discomfort (makes discomfort tangible) in order to offer people the chance to confront and challenge their perceptions of (dis)comfort. Discomfort objects allow users to interact physically with objects specifically made to evoke feelings of discomfort, feelings that are normally avoided. Like we have seen, dolls and humanoid figures (both whole and disassembled parts) can evoke feelings of discomfort (pretty universally)-- so they are used in this project to do just this. On the flip side of this, fabric is used to offer users some comfort in their interactions

with these objects. Fabrics have offered comfort to humankind since the ice age keeping the body warm, dry, and protected and are used in this project with the understanding that woven materials can offer universal feelings of security and safety. In the middle of the 20th century psychologist Henry Harlow studied infant rhesus monkeys who, similar to human infants, express emotions and have to be nursed by a mother. Harlow took the mothers away from their babies and replaced them with dummies. One “mother” was made of wire, and the other was

Objectifying Discomfort

made from cloth. The baby monkeys preferred to cuddle with the cloth “mother” over the wire mother regardless of which one had the bottle to feed them. When the wire “mother” had their food, the babies would come to her for feeding, but once they were finished they were quick to leave, and they never went to it if it didn’t possess food. When the baby monkeys were scared they would go cuddle the cloth “mother” (A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries: Harry Harlow).

The comfort brought about by physical interaction with fabric, and the discomfort evoked by dolls, are the two major drivers for this project. The hope is that users’ interactions with discomfort objects will present opportunities for users to come to their own understandings of what “comfort” really means to them and the world outside of themselves. Every discomfort object is handmade from recycled materials. Time to get uncomfortable!

Awareness + Perception

“In an aspirational sense, the culture moves... allegiances are not what makes architecture, but instability makes it move. And instability means confusion, discomfort, uncertainty...” -Eric Owen Moss, The Architecture Of Discomfort

Objectifying Discomfort

Children inspecting doll heads (Wild).

objectified discomforts

Objectifying Discomfort

An English doll mold (Wild).

Objectified Discomforts

object 1 This object, and all of the objects that follow, is made up of two pieces. The “doll” body is sewn out of recycled fabric and housed in a plastic doll torso. The material is filled with rice and lavender to offer a comforting weight and scent. On the “arm” and “legs” of the object there is a bright colored yarn that is extremely soft and begs to be touched. A plastic doll head sits on top. The “seat” part of the object is made from the same materials as the “doll” with one addition of a lens that allows for the viewing of the seat contents. A “leg” sticks out from the side of the “seat” that matches the leg on the “doll”. When the “doll” is

placed on top of the “seat” it appears as if the doll has two legs. This intends to get at the question, where is the line between human and object? The two pieces of the object can be interacted with separately or simultaneously. Bright orange and pink colors are used to attract people initially to the object and the use of smells, textures, and weight are used to try to keep people’s attention. The object allows for an exploration of the boundaries between human and object while also exploring what characteristics make a “doll” a doll and what makes dolls strange or uncanny.

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

a head and a torso from different dolls offer an opportunity for the user to question the origins of the object

twisted wool yarn begs to be touched

RIC

ICE

colorful fabric calls attention to the object and encourages interaction

RIC E

RIC

rice filling gives the object weight

RIC

dried lavender encourages intimacy between object and user

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

Objectifying Discomfort

make your own object 1:

Objectified Discomforts

1. gather all of your supplies.

3. cut out the pattern twice and sew together about 1/8” from the edge. do not sew neck, leave open to stuff.

2. create a pattern for a plush body.

4. insert body material into doll torso with limbs extending. stuff with rice, foam, or any desired filling until body is plump.

5. attach yarn, beads, buttons, or any desired additions to the body. attach doll head.

6. done!

Objectifying Discomfort

(Wild).

Objectified Discomforts

object 2 This object is again made up of two pieces. The first is a rope-like piece sewn from fabric and filled with rice to give it weight. On one end a small doll torso and its moveable legs portrude from the fabric. The other end of this piece splits into two, with a porcelin doll leg sticking out of one side. The portion of this piece that is clad in cow print material is filled with foam instead of rice to allow for it to be tied up tighter than rice would allow. The second piece of object 2 is the cube portion. This yellow block is filled with foam and has a hole through the center of it to allow the first piece to be strung through it. In

addition to the center hole, the cube also sports wooden beads strung onto one edge and “legs” sticking up from one side. These legs are filled with foam and offer opportunities to tie them up with the first piece. This object is meant to evoke feelings of uncanniness through both the doll parts sewn into it, as well as through the movement of the first piece through the cube piece. It is also meant to encourage individuals to practice self expression through manipulation of the “legs”.

Objectifying Discomfort

the cube and its protruding legs are filled with foam, making the object soft and squishy

RIC

colorful fabric calls attention to the object and encourages interaction

red and white wooden beads ask to be touched

RIC

doll legs are attached to the ends of fabric legs

RIC

rice fills only the snake legs, giving them more weight then the cube

Objectified Discomforts

100

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

101

102

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

103

104

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

105

106

Objectifying Discomfort

Dolls (Wild).

Objectified Discomforts

object 3 The third object, again made up of two separate pieces, offers new textures to invoke a sense of curiosity through touch. Balls made of fabric and foam collect on parts of both pieces as well as colorful yarn. Both of these elements are meant to encourage initial interaction with the object. Inset on the underside of one piece there is a smooshed in doll face that is glued into the surrounding fabric.

Adjacent to this face there is another lens that offers a look into the object, although the head portion is hollow. The brown portion of this piece is filled with foam. The second piece of object 3 is a fabric ring filled with foam. This piece allows for the insertion of the first into the center of its hole, or offers an opportunity to wear it on one’s body.

107

108

Objectifying Discomfort

dark, neutral colored fabric allows attention to be drawn to brighter elements of the object

fabric balls add texture

RIC

an inverted doll face waits to have a conversation

bright yarn begs to be touched

RIC

the object is filled with foam making it soft and squishy

Objectified Discomforts

109

110

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

111

112

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

113

114

Objectifying Discomfort

Patients at a Portuguese doll hospital (Sacheti).

Objectified Discomforts

object 4 Object 4 consists of two “pillows” at the scale of the body. Pillow limbs sport long fingers and moments that afford user(s) to blur the boundary between themselves and the object. Strange textures promote curiosity to the origins, uses, and meanings

behind the object. Object 4 allows for flexibility in its use. Users can snuggle up with just one, or with both pillows. More than one person can interact with Object 4 at a time, encouraging conversation around themes of (dis) comfort among users.

115

116

Objectifying Discomfort

yellow and a fleshy pink fabric are sewn into long fingers and strange orifices

RIC

fabric balls add a strange texture

large chunks of foam are visible through the fabric

Objectified Discomforts

117

118

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

119

120

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

settle in: (left) the eighteen moves it took for a user to become comfortable with object 4. (above) a user has fallen asleep while intertwined with the object.

121

122

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

123

124

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

125

126

Objectifying Discomfort

Doll eyes (Sasheti).

Objectified Discomforts

object 5 Oh you thought it was just a chair? Think again. Object 5 offers an experience for users to become a part of their furniture and sport it around town. However, this doesn’t happen right way, it takes some time to become comfortable with being a walking set of intestines. This wearable piece is

made from an old foam mattress and second hand blankets. You can sit on it, fall asleep inside of it with your dog laying on top, or wear it while you wash the dishes. However you choose to embody Object 5, one thing is for sure: you will draw some looks, even if they’re just in the mirror.

127

128

Objectifying Discomfort

light knit fabric makes the outside of the object while brighter colors are nested inside as arms...

RIC

this entire object is stuffed with foam to give you a soft hug

Objectified Discomforts

C B A

A C

Object 5 consists of three things: the outermost pillow [1], the inner cube [2], and the arms [3]. Each of them is sewn and stuffed with recycled mattress foam; some arms are also stuffed with fabric. The arms are sewn inbetween the outermost pillow

and the inner cube where their openings line up on four sides. The arms are able to snake their way through the openings and inbetween the pillows, around a body and out the sides.

129

130

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

131

132

Objectifying Discomfort

&*@!&*$#*

Objectified Discomforts

// Here I am again... feeling strange... maybe it is time to try out this chair...I am sinking deeper and deeper here I go here we go here we go...

...I’m absolutely consumed... how long can I just sit on the ground here before I go mad? Maybe I just need to relax... have a snack... //

133

134

Objectifying Discomfort

// wash my dishes, project myself, my face! okay out the door we go... //

&*@!&*$#* &*@!&*$#*

Objectified Discomforts

135

136

Objectifying Discomfort

Conceptual renderings

Object 5 allows the user to objectify themselves. Through time spent with the object, the user can explore its inner workings and experience an endless series of intimate interactions. The malleable foam-filled fabric arms ask to be pulled out from the inside of the object and wrapped around the user. When these arms begin to come out of the object, the user can climb

inside. It is in these interactions with the object that the user/object boundary begins to be blurred. The user can crawl all the way inside of the object and take a nap, or wear it around like a piece of clothing. The long arms are able to be looped through the holes in the object, tied up with each other, or held by the user.

Objectified Discomforts

Barbie-scale mock up for testing.

137

138

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

139

140

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

141

142

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

143

144

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

145

146

Objectifying Discomfort

A paper doll (Oatman-Stanford).

Objectified Discomforts

the orb The orb takes discomfort on the road! Build your own personal orb from second-hand materials (or reclaim an abandoned one left behind by a fellow extreme comfort abolitionist) and start rolling. It is made of three components: the structure, the arms, and you. Your orb moves

like a tank- rolling up and over anything it wishes, climbing up the sides of apartment buildings, over suburban rooftops, or rolling through city streets. The orb can travel to the people, wherever they may be. If you can build your own orb there’s no need for a car!

147

148

Objectifying Discomfort

orb suits are made from recycled fabric to keep the user secure and warm

RIC

old mannequins and other recycled materials make for great orb legs

RIC

The structure of an orb can be made from recycled materials found around town (see “make your own orb” for details). The shell structure forms a sphere with holes- these are both

spaces for the legs to attach into, as well as openings for the arms to reach out from. The orb suit attaches to the interior of the shell.

Objectified Discomforts

149

150

Objectifying Discomfort

(top) a plush study model with a rotating center. (middle) a model of an orb’s structure. (bottom) diagrams of an orb structure and orb legs. (right) materials to make an orb.

Objectified Discomforts

151

152

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

An orb spreads discomfort while it moves as its strange legs scrape against the streets and its arms reach forth from within. Like a circus, orbs can roll into town for a day or two and leave whenever they please. The freedom of an orb’s movement allow users to reach a wide audiencethere is no place an orb cannot go, besides maybe the water, although this hasn’t been tested yet. Orbs afford

collaboration in your mobilizationreach your arms into the holes of other orbs and travel together as a group. They also present opportunities to pause and educate others on the exploitative natures of large corporations through media, puppetry, and conversation. Spread discomfort as you move in your orb and hold conversations along the way!

153

154

Objectifying Discomfort

From your orb you can spread the good message of how to deny consumer support to exploitative companies and instead stand with your local community. Store small discomfort objects within your orb to

give to the people you meet and get them thinking about their own perceptions of (dis)comfort. Show them how to create their own objects of discomfort or make their own orb.

Objectified Discomforts

a conceptual collage looking at orb connections and the power of puppetry.

155

156

Objectifying Discomfort

EXERCISE AUTONOMY (top) a conceptual rendering of one version of an orb in action. (bottom left) an orb rolls over a car. (bottom right) a propaganda poster that reads: “exercise autonomy”.

Objectified Discomforts

a propaganda poster that reads: “come and live in the uncanny valley”.

157

158

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

(top) an early conceptual collage inspired by (bottom) a British tank from WWI.

An orb moves like a tank, so there are no limits on where you can go. It’s design was inspired by a British WWI tank whose treads wrap the entirety of the body allowing it to roll over

whatever lies in its path. Verticality is no issue for an orb as long as there are small crevasses and ledges to gain traction from. Roll to the roof of an apartment and put on a show!

159

160

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

161

162

Objectifying Discomfort

make your own orb!

Objectified Discomforts

Jump in a dumpster, check out a garage sale, loosen a few bolts around town and start collecting items to make your own orb...

Step1: assemble the orb structure into a sphere.

Step 3: cut out and sew your arm suit.

Step 2: attach legs into about two thirds of the openings. secure them tightly!

Step 4: combine and climb in.

Step 5: roll!

163

164

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

https://dalesdolls.cargo.site/Leah A mock Amazon website brings all of these discomfort objects together. The website is formatted to give users the impression that they are on Amazon’s actual website, but the objects that are “for sale” are all discomfort objects. The other links refer to precedents from the project, reading suggestions, patterns for making your own

objects, background information, and “sponsored ads” that call out the problematic elements of the corporation. The site aims to make users uncomfortable browsing what is normally meant to make your shopping experience as comfortable and convenient as possible.

165

166

Objectifying Discomfort

Banners flip across the home screen of the website.

Objectified Discomforts

167

168

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

All objects are listed for sale with titles that mimic how Amazon lists their products. The titles are long and excessive, and just like everything else on the page, they make the products appear cheap. Everyone wants a deal and Amazon knows this. On the left side of the page a sponsored ad points this out reading: “Notice how we make it seem like you’re always getting a deal? That’s because we know you love them. It’s also because we undersell at

a loss to keep you shopping here. We make up for these losses by cutting corners like exploiting the people who work for us.” Amazon is extremely careful to maintain its image as an inexpensive place to shop, which is why their website looks the way it does. The chaos of the product titles is just one small part of their calculated attempts to keep consumers coming back again and again.

169

170

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

171

172

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

173

174

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

What are sponsored advertisements on the real Amazon site are antiads on this mock site. In the places where Amazon normally markets their own products or products of paying companies, there are instead informational bits on the troubling activities of the corporation and how they manipulate consumers.

These ads normally appear next to every item consumers are shopping, so when they are turned into anti-ads they are harsh truths that a consumer has to face in order to “buy” an item. Consumers will realize that they cannot actually buy any of the items listed on the site, but they can find patterns to make their own objects.

175

176

Objectifying Discomfort

Links to shop and readings about consumerism and Amazon.

Objectified Discomforts

177

178

Objectifying Discomfort

There’s more online! Check out the site for yourself at https://dalesdolls.cargo.site/Leah

Objectified Discomforts

179

180

Objectifying Discomfort

Objectified Discomforts

181

182

Objectifying Discomfort

Salon time for a doll (Wild).

183

bibliography “A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries: Harry Harlow.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/bhharl.html. Psychologist Henry Harlow studied infant rhesus monkeys who, similar to human infants, express emotions and have to be nursed by a mother. Harlow’s experiment led him to take the mothers away from their babies, and replace them with dummies. One “mother” was made of wire, and the other was made from cloth. The baby monkeys preferred to cuddle with the cloth “mother” over the wire mother regardless of which one had the bottle to feed them. When the wire “mother” had their food, the babies would come to her for feeding, but once they were finished they were quick to leave, and they never went to it if it didn’t possess food. When the baby monkeys were scared they would go cuddle the cloth “mother”. Berzon, Alexandra, et al. “Amazon Has Ceded Control of Its Site. The Result: Thousands of Banned, Unsafe or Mislabeled Products.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 23 Aug. 2019, www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-has-ceded-control-of-its-site- the-result-thousands-of-banned-unsafe-or-mislabeled-products-11566564990. Blakemore, Erin. “Barbie’s Secret Sister Was a Sexy German Novelty Doll.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 8 Mar. 2019, www.history.com/news/barbie-inspiration-bild- lilli.

184

Objectifying Discomfort

Brown, Jessica. “The Powerful Way That ‘Normalisation’ Shapes Our World.” BBC Future, BBC, 19 Mar. 2017, www.bbc.com/future/article/20170314-how-do-we-determine- when-a-behaviour-is-normal. Burke, Christopher. “Cell XXVI, 2003 (Detail).” Guggenheim Bilbao, Fundacion BBVA, Madrid, bourgeois.guggenheim-bilbao.eus/en/portrait-cells. Buck, Andrew. “57 Amazon Statistics Sellers Need to Know.” LandingCube, 2 Nov. 2020, landingcube.com/amazon-statistics/. Caine, Danny. How to Resist Amazon and Why: the Fight for Local Economies, Data Privacy, Fair Labor, Independent Bookstores, and a People-Powered Future. Microcosm Publishing, 2021. Independent bookstore owner, Danny Caine, writes about the cruel working conditions, shoddy business model, and unchecked power that Jeff Bezos has created under Amazon. Caine offers solutions on how to resist supporting the corporate giant. Canepari, Zackary, et al. The Uncanny Lover. The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2015, www.nytimes.com/video/technology/100000003731634/the-uncanny- lover.html. Cave, Nick. “Nick Cave. Soundsuit. 2011: MoMA.” MOMA, The Museum of Modern Art, www.moma.org/collection/works/156386. Cheer, Louise. “The Artworks and Costumes of New Zealand’s World of WearableArt.”Daily Mail, Associated Newspapers, 24 Oct. 2016, www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ article-3865270/The-artworks-costumes-New-Zealand-s-World-WearableArt.html. Crowley, John E.. The Invention of Comfort : Sensibilities and Design in Early Modern Britain and Early America, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000. ProQuestEbook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/calpoly/detail.action?docID=3318193.

185

“Dolls: Collections. Stories. Traditions” at the African American Art & Culture Complex in San Francisco. Review of Exhibition Doll News, 2012, pp. 22–33, www.nashalindo. com/uploads/3/4/4/6/34466136/dolls.pdf. “Dolls Factory: How Dolls Are Made.” Performance by J.R. Ashby, Youtube, British Pathé, 1968, www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZhhxx5q5zs. Duhigg, Charles. “Is Amazon Unstoppable?” The New Yorker, Condé Nast, 10 Oct. 2019, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/10/21/is-amazon-unstoppable. “Good Guys Chucky Doll with Box.” Amazon, Universal Studios LLC, www.amazon.com/ Ron-Powell-Black-Drum-T-Shirt/dp/B00FGAKO2S. Ellison, David, and Andrew Leach. On Discomfort: Moments in a Modern History of Architectural Culture. 1st ed., Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2016. “Eric Owen Moss: The Architecture Of Discomfort.” World Architecture, 32BNY, 7 Dec. 2016, worldarchitecture.org/articles/cggzp/eric-owen-moss-the-architecture-of- discomfort.html. Everyone Benefits at a Tupperware Party! Ann and Thomas Damigella Collection, Archives Center, National Museum of American History, 1951. Freer, Andy. “Everybody’s Born Everybody Cries Everybody Shits Everybody Dies.” Snuff Puppets, snuffpuppets.com/what-we-do/everybody/. “Everybody” is the largest human puppet in the world measuring at 87ft long. It is made up of detachable body parts that allow for actors inside of them to move around freely and carry out a scripted play about life. In the play Everybody is killed by a brick falling on its head then experiences its entire life relived, beginning with its birth. The puppet is made by hand and is transportable, allowing the play to be performed almost anywhere. The promotional video of the performance went viral in 2016 as people across the globe connected and reacted to the large human puppet.

186

Objectifying Discomfort

Fry, Naomi. “The Women Who Mother Lifelike Baby Dolls.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 31 Jan. 2019, www.newyorker.com/culture/photo-booth/the-women-who- mother-lifelike-baby-dolls. Fishman, Charles. “Is Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin the Future of Space Exploration?” Smithsonian. com, Smithsonian Institution, Dec. 2016, www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/ rocketeer-jeff-bezos-winner-smithsonians-technology-ingenuity-award-180961119/. Gilbertson, Dawn. “Amazon Apologizes for Denying That Drivers Pee in Bottles: ‘A Long- Standing, Industry-Wide Issue’.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 3 Apr. 2021, www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/04/03/amazon-drivers-peeing-in- bottles-union-mark-pocan/7074993002/. Hamilton, Isobel Asher, and Annabelle Williams . “Amazon Workers Leading a Historic Push for Unionization in Alabama Describe Midnight ‘Education’ Meetings, an Unexpected Mailbox, and Streams of Anti-Union Flyers as They Go up against One of the World’s Most Powerful Companies.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 24 Mar. 2021, www.businessinsider.com/amazon-union-alabama-workers-describe-anti- union-tactics-bessemer-2021-3. Hawkes, Ponch. Nyet Nyet Women. Head Solutions Group. TD Ameritrade Holding Corporation, 2018, 2018 Millennials and Money Survey, s1.q4cdn.com/959385532/files/doc-downloads/research/2018/ Millennials-and-Money-survey.pdf. Hendricks, Galen, et al. “Trump’s Corporate Tax Cut Is Not Trickling Down.” Center for American Progress, 26 Sept. 2019, www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/ news/2019/09/26/475083/trumps-corporate-tax-cut-not-trickling/. Hesse, Monica. “Perspective | Women on TikTok Have Cracked the Code on How to Satirize Trump.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 24 May 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/women-on-tiktok-have-cracked-the-code- on-how-to-satirize-trump/2020/05/19/d002086e-9602-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5-story. html.

187

Jarrett, Christian. “The Psychology of Stuff and Things.” The Psychologist, Aug. 2013, thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-26/edition-8/psychology-stuff-and-things. By the age of two children have an understanding of possessions. Between the ages of two and four children make the assumption that whoever is the first person to possess an object is the object’s owner. By the age of six, children display the idea that when something belongs to their person it is inherently more valuable than if they did not posses that thing, this is understood as the “endowment effect”. Children display envy at very young ages when possession of an object is changed from their hands to another’s. In a study done by Bruce Hood and Paul Boom, three to six year olds were offered the opportunity to exchange their comfort object with a replica of it. The children in this study overwhelmingly did not wish to exchange their comfort objects with new ones, “as if [they] believed their special object has a unique essence, a form of magical thinking that re-appears in adulthood in our treatment of heirlooms, celebrity memorabilia and artwork”. Kennedy, Liz. “Corporate Capture Threatens Democratic Government.” Center for American Progress, 29 Mar. 2017, www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/ news/2017/03/29/429442/corporate-capture-threatens-democratic-government/. Klass, Perri. “A Firm Grasp on Comfort.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 Mar. 2013, well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/a-firm-grasp-on-comfort/. Transitional objects (sometimes called comfort objects) are common in pediatrician’s offices because they provide a sense of security and can relieve a child’s stress. They can be helpful when a child is getting a check up or being immunized. The idea of transitional objects was first presented when Pediatrician and psychoanalyst Dr. Donald Winnicott published his paper “Transitional Objects and Transitional Phenomena— a Study of the First Not-Me Possession” in 1953. The attachment children have to their transitional objects is though touch as well as smell, leaving some caregivers to refuse to wash their kid’s loved teddy bear or blanket, no matter how dirty it may be. Kramer, Lisa, director. Endowment Effect Demonstration by Lisa Kramer with Two Volunteers. YouTube, 9 Oct. 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Q30wNnL-0. The endowment effect is the idea that someone will put a higher price on something if they own it than if they did not own it. Lisa Kramer demonstrates this with two volunteers that come up onto the stage during her presentation. She gives the first volunteer a mug as a “gift” from herself, then proceeds to ask the volunteer how much money it would take for someone to buy the mug from her. After a few moments, the volunteer responds, “Ten bucks.” Kramer then

188

Objectifying Discomfort

asks the second volunteer how much money they would be willing to buy that same mug for from the first volunteer. The second volunteer says, “Five, six dollars.” This is an example of the endowment effect. Just by owning the mug, the value of the item was higher for the first volunteer, while for the second volunteer the mug was worth almost half of that value (a value of $10 vs $5/6). Lay, Stephanie. “Uncanny Valley: Why We Find Human-like Robots and Dolls so Creepy.” The Conversation, 10 Nov. 2015, theconversation.com/uncanny-valley-why-we-find- human-like-robots-and-dolls-so-creepy-50268. MessyNessy. “Meet Lilli, the High-End German Call Girl Who Became America’s Iconic Barbie Doll.” Messy Nessy Chic, 4 Jan. 2018, www.messynessychic.com/2016/01/29/ meet-lilli-the-high-end-german-call-girl-who-became-americas-iconic-barbie-doll/. McRobbie, Linda Rodriguez. “Don’t Get Too Comfortable: America’s Relentless Pursuit of Convenience and Relaxation.” BostonGlobe.com, The Boston Globe, 19 May 2018, www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2018/05/19/don-get-too-comfortable-america- relentless-pursuit-convenience-and-relaxation/liWGIaQgFNWMXVU7Pvl0rN/story. html. Linda McRobbie looks at some of the causes and consequences of American’s desires for comfort, and asks the question: “where does this quest for comfort lead?” What individuals consider (un)comfortable changes with time and between cultures. The idea of physical comfort wasn’t commonplace until it was being taught and learned in Anglo-American culture. One example McRobbie turns to is air conditioning, which was invented in 1902, and was only really used in commercial factories and offices until late in the century. By 1993, 68 percent of homes in the United States had air conditioning, with more and more people wanting cooler and more consistent home temperatures, and the definitions of comfort had changed. Part of the increase in air conditioning units in homes is due to climate change bringing in more frequent and intense heat waves, but the main cause is the change in people’s perception of comfort. McRobbie also speaks to the changes in American fashion that in large part was driven by college students’ adoption of athletic clothing into everyday activities. McRobbie, Linda Rodriguez. “The History of Creepy Dolls.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution, 15 July 2015, www.smithsonianmag.com/history/history-creepy- dolls-180955916/.

189

Mori, Masahiro. “The Uncanny Valley: The Original Essay by Masahiro Mori.” Translated by Karl F MacDorman and Norri Kageki, IEEE Spectrum: Technology, Engineering, and Science News, IEEE Spectrum, 12 June 2012, spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/ robotics/humanoids/the-uncanny-valley. Morse, Janice M., et al. “The Phenomenology of Comfort.” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 20, no. 1, 3 Nov. 1993, pp. 189–195., doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20010189.x. Comfort comes from the latin word confortare and is defined in part as a “state of embodiment that is beyond awareness… a state of an integrated body” (190). When the physical body faces discomfort its existence is no longer able to be ignored by the mind, distracting from how the mind normally interprets the world. What does it take to achieve comfort for medical patients? Nine themes of discomfort in the body are understood as follows: the dis-eased body, the disobedient body, the vulnerable body, the violated body, the enduring body, the resigned body, the deceiving body, the betraying body, and the betraying mind. Medical professionals must be able to first identify and differentiate these discomforts to then be able to help soothe discomfort. Museumadmin. “11 February 2019; Corn Husk Doll.” Frisco Native American Museum, Frisco Native American Museum, 11 Feb. 2019, nativeamericanmuseum.org/22- september-2014-corn-husk-doll-2/. Oatman-Stanford, Hunter. “From Little Fanny to Fluffy Ruffles: The Scrappy History of Paper Dolls.” Collectors Weekly, Auctions Online USA Ltd, 15 July 2013, www. collectorsweekly.com/articles/the-scrappy-history-of-paper-dolls/. “Our History.” Barbie, Mattel, barbie.mattel.com/en-us/about/our-history.html. “Paddle Doll.” Metmuseum.org, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, www.metmuseum.org/art/ collection/search/544216. “Plastic Doll.” How Products Are Made, Advameg, www.madehow.com/Volume-5/Plastic- Doll.html. Prinz, James. Soundsuit. New York, 2005.

190

Objectifying Discomfort

Sacheti, Priyanka. “The Art of Mending Memories: Inside the World’s Oldest Surviving Doll Hospital.” Adventure.com, 15 June 2018, adventure.com/portugal-oldest-doll- hospital/. Schweik, Susan M. The Ugly Laws: Disability in Public. NYU Press, 2009. JSTOR, www.jstor. org/stable/j.ctt9qgf13. Accessed 16 Nov. 2020. In The Ugly Laws : Disability in Public, author Susan M. Schweik writes about the history of anti-beggar laws, or “Ugly Laws”, in the United States as well as the Philippines (due to US imperialism). Schweik provides examples from Chicago, Omaha, and Columbus wherein people were discriminated against based on being so-called “ugly”. The law was targeted at people who the law saw described as diseased, maimed, mutilated, or in any way deformed, as well as people who the law called “abstractly disabled”. The “abstractly disabled” were any person who wasn’t a straight, white, American man, and who could be arrested for appearing “unsightly” in public. S Doll. “History of Dolls.” YouTube, YouTube, 26 Mar. 2019, www.youtube.com/ watch?v=TPHhq1xJsK8. Sabanoglu, Tugba. “Number of U.S. Amazon Prime Users 2018-2022.” United States, 1 Dec. 2020. Schoolov, Katie. How Amazon Delivers On One-Day Shipping. YouTube, YouTube, 15 July 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiafb0-gqF4. Slade, Lisa. “The Avian Trilogy.” AGSA, Art Gallery of South Australia, Adelaide, www. agsa.sa.gov.au/whats-on/exhibitions/2018-adelaide-biennial-australian-art-divided- worlds/patricia-piccinini/. Smith, Andy. “The Knitted Monsters of Tracy Widdess.” Hi Fructose, 15 May 2018, hifructose. com/2018/05/15/the-knitted-monsters-of-tracy-widdess/. Artist Tracy Widdess spends anywhere from 50-100 hours on each “monster” she knits. She started what she calls “brutal knitting” after being inspired by an article by Meg Swanson in Threads Magazine during a project to recreate knitted masks from the 1970s.

191

Suthivarakom, Ganda. “Welcome to the Era of Fake Products.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 Feb. 2020, www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/amazon- counterfeit-fake-products/. “The Rise of American Consumerism.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, www.pbs.org/wgbh/ americanexperience/features/tupperware-consumer/. “Thinking through Discomfort.” On Discomfort: Moments in a Modern History of Architectural Culture, by David Ellison and Andrew Leach, 1st ed., Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2017, pp. 1–6. Tsaplina, Marina. “Puppetry and Disability Aesthetics.” HowlRound Theatre Commons, Emerson College, 4 May 2020, howlround.com/puppetry-and-disability-aesthetics. Artist Marina Tsaplina argues the case for using puppetry as a way to challenge misconceptions of the disabled community. Turkle, Sherry. Evocative Objects: Things We Think With. The MIT Press, 2007. This collection of essays is about personal objects and their power in evoking both intellect and emotion in people. In each of the essays the author was asked to address the following questions about their object: “where does it take you?”; “what do you feel?”; and “what are you able to understand?” The essays are categorized by Turkle into six sections: Design and Play, Discipline and Desire, History and Exchange, Transition and Passage, Mourning and Memory, and Meditation and New Vision. Wild, Wolfgang. “Vintage Doll Factories Are Awfully Creepy.” Considerable, Considerable, 21 Aug. 2019, www.considerable.com/entertainment/retronaut/vintage-doll-factories- creepy/. Wilkins, Brett. “Emails Reveal Amazon Pushed USPS for Private Box at Alabama Warehouse as Union Vote Began.” Common Dreams, 8 Apr. 2021, www.commondreams.org/ news/2021/04/08/emails-reveal-amazon-pushed-usps-private-box-alabama- warehouse-union-vote-began.

192

Objectifying Discomfort

Williams, Lawrence E, and John A Bargh. “Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth.” Science (New York, N.Y.) vol. 322,5901 (2008): 606-7. doi:10.1126/science.1162548 In two studies researchers concluded that there is in fact a connection between a person’s physical experiences with temperature and positive social interactions with other individuals. Wu, Lisa, director. Finding Peace with Knitted Monsters. Youtube, CBC Arts, 4 May 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoMoRlQEmNQ. Canada-based artist Tracy Widdess uses knitting to cope with anxiety and depression. Widdess creates wearable masks with human features that are ripe with colors and textures creating uncanny effects. Zefrank1, director. Teddy Has An Operation. Youtube, 26 Apr. 2013, www.youtube.com/ watch?v=AdYaTa-lOf4&list=LLorbbllh7eeE4ffJToDgVTg&index=537.

193

194

Objectifying Discomfort

Object and Michael on a Zoom meeting.